Causal Inference in Counterbalanced Within-Subjects Designs
顺序平衡的被试内设计中的因果推断AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确使用潜在结果框架分析实验设计中的因果识别与序贯可交换性。
顺序平衡的被试内设计中的因果推断AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Experimental designs are fundamental for estimating causal effects. In some fields, within-subjects designs, which expose participants to both control and treatment at different time periods, are used to address practical and logistical concerns. Counterbalancing, a common technique in within-subjects designs, aims to remove carryover effects by randomizing treatment sequences. Despite its appeal, counterbalancing relies on the assumption that carryover effects are symmetric and cancel out, which is often unverifiable a priori. In this paper, we formalize the challenges of counterbalanced within-subjects designs using the potential outcomes framework. We introduce sequential exchangeability as an additional identification assumption necessary for valid causal inference in these designs. To address identification concerns, we propose diagnostic checks, the use of washout periods, and covariate adjustments, and alternative experimental designs to counterbalanced within-subjects design. Our findings demonstrate the limitations of counterbalancing and provide guidance on when and how within-subjects designs can be appropriately used for causal inference.